To me unless we get one of only a hanfull of guys who have had true success this might be a good score as that hsndfull won't be going anywhere and otherwise it would be more of the same ol same ol from the remaining possible candidates.

I know you what him to succeed as it bodes well for all of us.

I believe this is the start of a dynasty. Might take a few years...3... But we will be a dynasty and will obtain 2 cups in the next 8 years...

Questioning Trevor Linden's ability to be president infers that I'm Anti-Linden purely because of the fact that he is Trevor Linden.

Me asking questions makes people want to defend their "image" of who Trevor Linden is.

Trevor Linden should not be given a free pass on anything. Yes, he's a community icon but running a hockey team is serious business and I hope he's got good reliable counsel to help him out with his tough decisions.

And of course I want him to succeed.

But the more people challenge my arguments, the more I will defend them and unfortunately, I end up looking like an anti-Lindite. Such is life.

But the more people challenge my arguments, the more I will defend them and unfortunately, I end up looking like an anti-Lindite. Such is life.

Looking like a Luddite is more likely. The reason you are a moron and/ or you are being treated like one is two fold. You try to pretend you have a logical argument questioning whether linden has any relevant business experience yet you don't outline what any of that relevance would be. How is running a hockey team any more or less complicated than running any other business? In what ways are the demands different? Do the rules of commerce not apply in a vacuum? Is it fundementally different in the way that quantum mechanics is to physics? You claim to know, so tell us exactly, because logically speaking running a hockey franchise should not be fundamentally any different than running a Starbucks franchise. (The difference being merely in scope and size but not in kind. )

Hint: you have to be specific to call my bullshit here...

Also you come across as moronic when you resort to "attacking the poster rather than the argument" several times too many. Based on the principle that a billion Chinese can't be wrong, it's stupid to say that egg rolls suck. Your argument that linden has no relevant experience and is therefore a bad move is overly simplistic at best and several posters have shot you down over it.

a bright person would pick up on the fact that one person might be an asshole but two or three or more questioning your position reflects poorly on your position, not the other way round.

Plus, Whining about the method that other posters choose to flame you makes you look kinda girly. And yes there is something wrong with that. (Unless you are a girl of course)

As the great Gordon Gecko once said, "it's just like second grade, nobody likes a cry baby"

BTW claiming that no one knows who you are, and what you've done in your life, and what kind of expert you are in real life is the equivalent to a man saying he is out of tampons.

And finally, of course it's an old boys network in here, it's a goddamn hockey message board

IE. Sometimes math is too emotional and is making a big deal out of nothing.

Quite a shitty argument there strange. You're taking my enthusiasm and passion as a Canuck fan and applying it to my strictly logical argument of Trevor Linden doesn't have sufficient hockey management acumen and was the wrong choice to put out the dumpster fire that is the Vancouver Canucks.

What exactly is your argument because it sounds like you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Do you have a point? or is this just one of your long winded rants where it seems like you are posting because you like to see your own words.

We're on the same page with the whole business hockey acumen. Check.

We're on the same page with the concept of a figurehead. Check.

So.... what? What's the deal here?

Strangelove wrote:Do you recall yours truly ever saying that the management team will consist of...

"Gilman and Henning and McNab (or whoever) and... Linden"?

I don't think you do recall these things given the fact you never responded to any of it.

Sure, having a strong management team will definitely help Trev.

But why not hire a strong president in the first place so that that the "strong" management team you've listed above that has done the Canucks sooooo well since 2011 is put on notice? Why not bring someone new that has a strong vision that's done it once or twice before and isn't just happy to be here like Trevor seems to be.

How about impartiality? How about Trevor's pre-existing relationship with Stan Smyl? You think Trev has the kahunas to give steamer the pink slip if needed? I have no idea and I hope so. Our player development / drafting / farm team has been piss poor until recently. Can Trev make an accurate assessment and do what's required? What is he basing this accurate assessment on? His only resources and that's the existing Canuck management team.

Being brand spanking new means being a yes-man. Henning tells Trevor something is so, Trevor doesn't have the experience to say no and propose a different way of doing things.

You have to be an asshole sometimes when you're the president. Does Trev have that in him? Again, I have no idea and I hope so.

And Strange, STOP WITH THE FUCKING PERSONAL INSULTS. This board is way too fucking lenient allowing shit like that. You want to talk about logic, how about the discussion you and I had about Torterella's coaching style. I called you out on EXACTLY on what your arguments were and there was no response.

There's nothing more interesting than watching an online pissing match as people postulate about the future. We don't know what's going happen, so we are all correct at this point in time. Additionally, unless anyone on this board has had business dealings with Mr Linden, then were all just guessing at his abilities.

Also, it would be a good idea to tone down the insults, and I consider words like 'moronic' an insult.

Here we are at an exciting crossroads for the franchise and people are too busy looking for rulers. If you're going to continue measuring dicks, please use the PM service we have provided.

BurningBeard wrote:Trevor Linden scored his first hat trick in a game against the Minnesota North Stars, about a month into his rookie season. The Canucks ended up losing that game 7-6. The first thing he did after the lose was walk into the dressing room and smash his stick into pieces. Remember, this was when he was 18 years old. Can you see Bure ever doing that? Not to bad mouth Bure, he stands on his own, but that's the difference. That's also why he's in his current position.

I wish Linden would of smashed Messier's face after what was done to him in 94. *hehe* Well, I do remember Bure kicking the bench and/or smashing a stick or something after he missed a scoring opportunity in 94. A coach came to try to calm him down right away. Also, I don't see Bure wanting to manage a hockey team and be in the spotlight again. I think he's happy just to live quietly with the fortune he has made.

mathonwy wrote:We're on the same page with the whole business hockey acumen. Check.

Here is a good example.

Check, finally, but my issue with you is that you took so long to see a 'Check' here (plainly stated all along).

Even as recently as your previous post you clearly thought it wasn't 'Check' with us here.

And now, by some miracle it appears you finally get it!

(but I'm half expecting yo to go back to accusing me of disagreeing with you on this matter)

Seriously, you... are... that... freaking... weird!

mathonwy wrote:We're on the same page with the concept of a figurehead. Check.

UMMM NO, we have NEVER been on the same page on this one.

THAT WAS ARE BIG POINT OF CONTENTION.

If you're asking to now jump your ship and climb aboard the SS Strangelove, it's just too weird at this point

.... so I say must fuck no.

You have continually screamed (bloodcurdling) "TL is much more that a figurehead oh no oh no WE'RE RUINED!!"

(paraphrased).

Meanwhile yours truly has said RELAX, just a figurehead, just part of a team he will mostly defer to.

And now you completely reverse your position and claim we have agreed on the matter all along.

mathonwy wrote:So.... what? What's the deal here?

If I had to guess, I'd have to say you're somewhat delusional

Probably should have said that rather than "moronic".

Sorry, I intended to use the word "moronic" in a constructive sense.

"Delusional" is a much less harsh word.

mathonwy wrote:

Strangelove wrote:Do you recall yours truly ever saying that the management team will consist of...

"Gilman and Henning and McNab (or whoever) and... Linden"?

I don't think you do recall these things given the fact you never responded to any of it.

Sure, having a strong management team will definitely help Trev.

But why not hire a strong president in the first place so that that the "strong" management team you've listed above that has done the Canucks sooooo well since 2011 is put on notice? Why not bring someone new that has a strong vision that's done it once or twice before and isn't just happy to be here like Trevor seems to be.

Trevor seems much more than "just happy just to be here".

Trevor wants this team to succeed and he wants to contribute to that success as far as he is capable.

It is what he said and what we who know him... know is in his DNA.

What the Aquilinis have done here is said we're not going to choose the GM this time (like we did with Gillis).

We are going to have a charismatic hockey guy who is well connected to do this.

We know that he has well established hockey ops guys in Gilman/Henning to council him

.... as well as friends in high places who would be glad to help out there old buddy.

Linden will represent the owners in meetings and conversations.

Linden will try to instill his basic philosophy and his intense will to win throughout the organization.

Linden will present a vision on the of what kind of the the kind of executives and players who should be sought.

He won’t be managing the salary cap or negotiating contracts.

In the beginning he'll be probably be rubber-stamping everything McNab/Gilman/Henning come up with.

But why are we arguing about this if you already said "Check" to "figurehead"??

mathonwy wrote:And Strange, STOP WITH THE FUCKING PERSONAL INSULTS.

I did not have malice in my heart, and I agree the word "moronic" was a bad choice

.... so HOW ABOUT YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP.

For a guy who dishes a lot of dat dere out, you sure as hell whine a lot about it.